20040326.pdfFDATE RECEIVED.
CITY OF EDMONDS
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION
OWNER NAME/NAME OF BUSINESS
k " 10 H �A -kA *k. L U t�,%
M MAILING ADDRESS
W
z
-:1::
0 F L W
CITY ZIP TFtEPHONE
'Z�` - 7
L--d.j 14 1>
NAME
LLJ
L- ADDRESS
CITY ZIP I TELEPHONE
NAME ICBLO
ADDRESS
C ITY ZIP I TELEPHONE
STATE LICENSE NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE I CHECKED BY
NO.
NEW RESIDENTIAL
PLUMBING / MECH
ADDITION
COMMERCIAL
COMPLIANCE OR
CHANGE OF USE
1:3 REMODEL
MULTIFAMILY
SIGN
1:1 REPAIR
GRADING
CYDS
FENCE
( X FP,
0 DEMOLISH
TANK
o
OTHER
IGARAGE
I
RETAININGWALL
E3
FIRE SPRINKLER
FIRE ALARM
CARPORT
ROCKERY
(TYPE OF USE, BUSINESS OR ACTIVITY) EXPLAIN:
NUMBER
NUMB R OF
—CRITI� ALLZ/
OF
DWELLING
AREAS rz? L(
STORI0a;fi' Z
UNITS
NUM13ER t>j P-Ial:d TZ
DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE
PERMIT EXPIRES
USE PERMIT
ZONE NUMBER,,
JOB —
ADDRESS 151,
S T#
5
PLAT NAME/SUBDIVISION NO. LOT NO.
LID NO.
LID FEE $
TTESCP Approved C3
E3
PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PER OFFICIAL STREET MAP
RW Permit Arnit"roo
V
[03
Street Use Permit Roq'd
EXISTING - PROPO(
SED
1, prict, Reciiij, d
inspection Reqt1lied
I
" R , E
sidewalk Required C3
REQUIRED DEDICATION- FT
unuL,W.ouncl
wiring inquired 13
METER SIZE
NO. OF FIXTURES
PRV REQUIRED
YES NO 13
REMARKS
OWNER/CONIRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR EROSION CONTROLiDRAINAGE
/Ki c-
EERING REVIEWED BY DATE
REVIEWED By' DATE
VARIANCE OR CU SHORELINE OR ADB# INSPECTION BOND
REO'D POSTED
OYES [2rNO S
SEPA REVIEW SIGN AREA HEIGHT
COMPLETE , EXEMPT ALLOWED I PROPOSED ALLOWED PROPOSED
EXP
LOT COVERAGE REQUIRED SETBACKS (FT) PROPOSED SETBACKS (FT)
ALLOWED PROPOSED FRONT SIDE REAR FRONT LIR SIDE REAR
�AIA NA 0 0 0
PARKING LOT AREA PLANNING REVIEWED BY DATE
REQ'D I PROVIDED
NC, I n "/.,- /C)4
REMARKS Pit r Cc- , i .3o.ays'.e' i4o*VA QLWr"rLP
Uj
z
z
t1i
a
z
2
z
Z5176 qf� ljvt Aj Lg�� ma
P ti�a i
CHECKED tBYTYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CODE OCCUPANT
!47 GROUP Y
SPECIAL INSPECTIOri AREA OCCUPANT
REQUIRED [] YES LOAD
0
REMARKS Z
PROGRESS INSPECTIONS PER UBC 108/FINAL INSPECTION REQ'D �
)t - - " � j - J/ i ,P� ". - -A-1 Ae,4,9.- 0,/-123
VALUATION
Description FEE Description FEE
Plan Check State Surcharge
HEAT SOURCE GLAZING % LOT SLOPE % City Surcharge_
I Building Permit
PLAN CHECK NO: VESTED DATE Plumbing Base Fee
/)//— Lg Mechanical
THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES ONLY THE WORK NOTED. THIS PERMIT COVERS WORK TO -
BE DONE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ONLY. ANY CONSTRUCTION ON THE PUBLIC Grading
DOMAIN (CURBS, SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS, MARQUEES, ETC.) WILL REQUIRE
.j SEPARATE PERMISSION.
Engr. Review
2
cc PERMIT APPLICATION: 180DAYS
III
IL PERMIT LIMIM I YEAR - PROVIDED WORK IS STARTED WITHIN 180 DAYS Engr. Inspection
SEE BACK OF PINK PERMIT FOR MORE INFORMATION
U) 'APPLICANT, ON BEHALF OF HIS OR HER SPOUSE. HEIRS. ASSIGNS AND SUCCESORS Fire Review Plan Chk. Deposit
in — — -
�j IN INTEREST, AGREES TO INDEMNIFY. DEFEND AND HOLD HARMLESS THE CITY OF
2 EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. ITS OFFICIALS, EMPLOYEES, AND AGENTS FROM ANY AND Fire Inspection Receipt #
ALL CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES OF WHATEVER NATURE. ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY
FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT. ISSUANCE OF THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BE
DEEMED TO MODIFY, WAIVE OR REDUCE ANY REQUIREMENT OF ANY CITY ORDINANCE Landscapelnsp. Total Amt. Due
0 NOR LIMIT IN ANY WAY THE CITYS ABILITY TO ENFORCE ANY ORDINANCE PROVISION.'
Recording Fee Receipt #
I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION; THAT THE INFORMATION APPLICATION AFPROVAL
GIVEN IS CORRECT; AND THAT I AM THE OWNER, OR THE DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT OF
WITH CITY AND STATE LAWS REGULATING CONSTRUC- This application is not a perrifil Until signed by the
THE OWNER. I AGREE TO COMPLY CALL Building Official or his/her Deputy: and Fees are paid, and
TION; AND IN DOING THE WORK AUTHORIZED THEREBY. NO PERSON WILL BE EMPLOYED
IN VIOLATION OF THE LABOR CODE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RELATING TO FOR INSPECTION receipt is acknowledged in space provided.
WORKMEN�S 9005t4iiStTION INSURANCE AND RCW —0-�FICJA IONATURE DATE
DATE SLINED f
(OWNER AGEN (425)
SIGNATUR ILOWNER21 1k) A
771-0220 �LE EDIBr
)WfE- NTION E)ff 1333
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO USE OR OCCUPY A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE UNTIL
A FINAL INSPECTION HAS BEEN MADE AND APPROVAL OR A CERTIFI- ORIGINAL - FILE YELLOW - INS
CATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN GRANTED. UBC SECTION 109 PINK - OWNER GOLD - ASSESSOR
09/03 PRESS HARD -YOU ARE MAKING 4 COPIES
z
0
1
0
M
--i -n
(n
M
C
M
0
—40
0 C:
—4 K
X M
M Z
r) --I
C
x
0)
0
n
M M
0 6
0 r-
0 M
C C0
9 Cn
M C-)
Z
z
C/)
z
0
M
I
�E:Wfi0i`�DS.
�-i--Y OF
F-lUP-DING DEPARTMENT
vm,v
-V��nck PPROVED ;.)A'rE
-4p�n \Jc�� p LDG 0"PlGlAi
Pb FEE R Kvil N1 U
/�7
S:
APPHOVED AS NOTED
BY ENGINEERING 1101,
'vn
Pate:
IVIA,<e R-E F c- N E b o E No r.
CZ S
?�EST-(k 1,CT A -CL
c-, T-y co j: c-, u r/,& r- (,(g"
GO
&)
ct,
APMOVEI) BY ll)LAl\lNIN(-"
iRy
m
56
LA.)
m ten
0
cm
m At rKUVr.V FLMN
m
CITY COPY
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
121 STH AVENUE NORTH EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwwxi.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
C.
March 11, 2004
Z-
0
Mr. John Vicklund
0
M
19515 94" PI. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Case'#BE-01-26 Fence Perrnit
M
C
M 0
0
Dear Mr. Vicklund.
0 0
C
M
I have read your March 1,. 2004 letter. A valid complaint was filed regarding the construction of t he fence
M Z
on your property at 19515 90 Place West. The City is obligated to follow through with enforcing the code
C z
related to this complaint. In an effort to bring resolution to this matter, I am willing to ma ke the followina
>
r
concessions.
The City will:
co�
0 -n
-n
Waive any penalties for work done without a permit
M M
Waive the critical areas detennination requirement
0 Cl)
Or
0 M
You will be required to:
0
0 Subrriit a complete building permit application for the fence
:Mo�
z r-
0 Pay the S50 perntit and S 15 surcharge fees
x
I understand the deep concerns that you have about your neighbor but the issue here is the need for a fence
pern nor I recall ever giving you
-dt. As stated in our February 26j 2003 letter to you, neither Steve
>
z
permission to install a fence without a pern-Lit. I am wil lincy to make the concessions I have noted above in
recognition of your concerns to put this matter to rest.
C&
Enclosed is a building permit application and fence handout. Please submit a building permit application'
z
0
bv March 3 1, 2004 or the City will be forced to begin code enforcement act ion.
.
R F-F-vVED
0
M
Sincerely,
PERM11 coUNTER
Dtrane'ffowman
Development Services Director
Cc: Pvlayor Haakenson R E C' I='
Mike Thies, Code Enforcement Inspector
Enclosures
PEMV
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
-..M
JOHN H. VICKLUND
19515 94" Pl. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020 LU
>
WM
March 1, 2004
Mike Teece
Code Enforcement Inspector
City of Edmonds
th
1215 Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Fencing at 19515 94" Pl. W.
Dear Mr. Teece
We are absolutely incredulous that you are pursuing this matter. As we explained in our
letter dated September 11, 2001, both Duane Bowman and Steve Bullock meet at our
home on December 7, 2000 and stated that no ermit was required for any of our fencing.
p
We are especially shocked that the City of Edmonds has allowed Builder, Duane
Landsverk to destroy an environmentally sensitive area by clearing trees prior to
has then failed to enforce the code requiring the replanting of trees
obtaining permits, and
that were removed.
We stand on the information given to us by Duane Bowman and Steve Bullock that no
permit was required for our fence.
Sincerely,
V
tin H. Vicklund
CC Mayor Haakenson
40 C. 1 S) 11
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: www.dedmonds.wa.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
Planning - Building - Engineering
January 7, 2004
Mr. and Mrs. Vicklund
19515 94" PI.W.
Edmonds, WA. 98020
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
z
0
4
0
M
Case: # BE-01-26 - Fence
Subject Property: 19515 94" Pl. W., Edmonds, WA. 98020
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Vicklund,
In appraising the current code enforcement case load it was noted that the required permit for your fence
had not been obtained as requested.
As noted in the enclosed letter sent February 26, 2003, Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC)
17.30.000.(A) states:
"A jence pernift shall be requiredfor anyfence over threefeet in height which is also within I Ofeet of
any street right-of-way or access easenzent or within 30feet of any corner. Height shall be ineasured
fi-om the top of thefence to the lowest original grade
The fence that was constructed along the north side of your property borders an access and utilities
easement and is over three feet therefore a fence permit is required.
Due to the relatively simple nature of the permit and the length of the violation case it is in everyone's best
interest to bring this case to conclusion. I am available to meet with you at your convenience and request if
you have any questions regarding this case. A Permit Coordinator will process your application.
Corrective action required:
Please submit a complete application and fees for a fence permit at your earliest convenience by
February 15, 2004.
If you have any questions or need any information please call. Thank you in advance for your cooperation
and assistance.
Sincerely
Mike Thies
Code Enforcement Inspector
tliies(@,ci.edmonds.wa.us
enclosures: "Fence Permit Submittal Requirements"
Critical Areas Checklist
Letter of February 26, 2003
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
14 C. 1 8C)13
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 , FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwacLedmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
February 26, 2003
Case: # BE-0 1 -26 - Fence
Subject Property: 19515 94h Pl. W., Edmonds, WA. 98020
Mr. and Mrs. Vicklund
1951594 1h pl.W.
Edmonds, WA. 98020
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Vicklund,
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
I'm sorry it has taken so long to follow up on the open case at the subject property. The
enforcement position has been in transition and the high case load has been prioritized
accordingly.
According to the case file, it appears you had a meeting at the subject property with Steve
Bullock and Duane Bowman in December of 2000 regarding the tree cutting that had
taken place at an adjacent property. Mr. Bullock responded to you in a letter dated March
5, 2001 regarding the City's conclusions on the tree cutting.
As you're aware, the City received a complaint in February of 2001 regarding a fence on
the subject property over six feet in height and also over three feet in height along the
right-of-way. You received a letter from the Code Enforcement Inspector dated August
17, 2001 requesting all required applications and full fees by September 14, 2001.
You responded to the Code Enforcement Inspector in a letter dated September 11, 2001.
In that letter you reference Mr. Bowman's and Mr. Bullock's visit of December 2000.
You wrote that you "had their approval for the fence and sport court enclosure" and "they
told us that the fence that we had completed in December of 2000 did not require a
pen -nit variance if the latticework in the fence design was installed after a proposed city
ordinance was approved."
There is nothing in the file notes indicating any type of field approval from Mr. Bullock
or Mr. Bowman nor do they recall giving any approvals for a fence on the subject
property.
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Jaoan
Z
0
4
0
M
-1 -n
US -i
3:
M
0
0
--110
0 C
M
M Z
JO
C
co
0 -n
n
M M
0 —Cn
0 r-
0 M
C C/)
K W
Q 0
Z
3:
Z
Cn
Z
0
1
0
M
2/26/2003, BE-0 1 -26, Vicklund, 19515 94h P1. W.
After inspecting the subject property and reviewing engineering maps the fence
construction at its current location does require a pen -nit according to the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC) 17.30.000.(A) which states:
"A fence permit shall be requiredfor anyfence over threefeet in height which is also
within I Ofeet of any street right-of-way. or access easement or within 30feet of any
corner. Height shall be measuredfrom the top of thefence to the lowest original
grade ".
The fence that was constructed along the north side of your property borders an access
and utilities easement therefore requires a fence permit. Any additional assessments
regarding the distance to the comer, the fence height possibly exceeding 6 feet or the
trellis's total length as a percentage of the property line will be addressed at Application
review.
Corrective action required:
Please submit a complete application and fees for a fence permit at your earliest
convenience by March 31, 2003.
If you have any questions or need any information please call. Thank you in advance for
your cooperation and assistance.
Sincerely,
Mike Thies
Code Enforcement Inspector
thies(@,ci.edmonds.wa.us
c. Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Steve Bullock, Senior Planner
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
z
0
4
0
M
JOHN 1-1. VICKLUND 'k.-C A��;
19515 94th Pl. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020 SEP
Phone: 425-776-3487 81JILDI)Va 2001
C"'Y OF ""PARt,4
September H, 2001
Jason 'rourtellot
Code Enforcement Inspector
City of Edmonds
121 5"' Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Mr. Tourtellot,
This letter is in response to your letter of August 18, 2001 in which you informed us of a citizen
complaint regarding a fence oil our property at 19515 94"' Pl. W. The issue of fencing our
-nber when you
property for protection from our neighbors was first discussed with you in Decei
came to our property to investigate a complaint we had made regarding Unpermited tree cutting
on the slope adjacent to our property. Following our meeting with you two representatives from
the Planning Department were sent by the Mayor to discuss our concerns.
During this meeting oil December 7, 2000, Steve Bullock and Duane Bowillan explained tile
n h
City's rules, codes and guidelines for fences and together we walked our property lines a d ad
their approval for the fence and sport court enclosure. Please Verify Our meeting with Mr.
Bowman and Mr. Bullock. In our meeting we discussed fence height restrictions and they told us
that the fence that we had completed in December of 2000 did not require a permit variance if the
latticework in tile fence design was installed after a proposed city ordinance was approved.
Accordingly, the latticework on the wood fence was completed after the Edmonds City Council
passed Ordinance #3348 oil March 1, 2001. As a result of these discussions we were under tile
assumption that no additional variance was required, and that our installer, Town and Country
Fence Company had tile appropriate permit to complete our fencing project.
Needless to say we are confused by tile inconsistent manner that the City of Edmonds has
followed in code enforcement. Are we to assume by the receipt of this letter that the City is now
actively enforcing its codes, and if so that you will be enforcing the code requiring the replanting
of trees that were removed Without permit oil the soutil slope adjacent to our property?
We have made, and will continue to make every effort to work with the City and comply with the
City's codes. It is our understanding that we are not out of compliance. If additional information
is required please inform us.
Sincerely
1�' ,1/— 4,
lin Vicklund
C Cc Mayor Haakenson, D. Bowman
clM
z
9
0
M
GARY HAAKENSON
CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 FAX (425) 771-0221
Website: wwad.edmondsma.us
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
. 0 NA; , a i
89'�' Plann ng U "�j "V
August 17, 2001
John Vickland
19515 94t" Place West
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Fence
Dear Mr. Vickland,
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the City has received a citizens complaint
that you have constructed a fence without first obtaining the required fence permit.
Fences in the City are regulated by Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter
17.40 which requires the issuance of fence pen -nits prior to the start of work.
Enclosed please find the public handout(s) that assist citizens in filing for fence permits.
I have also enclosed other fori-ris that may be required. For example, if a Critical Areas
detennination has not been made on this property it must be completed at this time (note
a $45.00 fee is associated with this determination). Also, fence and penalty fees of
$85.00 are due at the time of fence application submittal. Please be advised, the
maximum height of fences is six feet. If the existing fence exceeds this height limit a
variance shall be required (variance fee $500.00).
I understand that you may have been unaware of our City fence regulations however,
compliance to the codes is mandatory for the fair and equal treatment of all citizens.
Please submit all required applications and full fees by September 14, 2001. 'If you have
any questions please feel free to call me at 425-771-0220.
Sincerely,
Jaso ourtellbot
C C f
orcen.
e Enforcement Inspector
Incorporated AUgLiSt 11, 1890
Sister City - Hekinan, Japan
Z
0
A
0
M,
-i -n
M
C
ma
0
-40
0 C
-.4
M
M Z
C —Z
o -n
-n
mc.
M M
0 —C#)
0 r-
0 M
a Cn
C CD
M 0
Z
Z
-4
X
0)
Z
0
i
0
M
-( .4 C. 1891,
March 5, 2001
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
Mr. and Mrs. Vickland
19515 94h'131. W. -1
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Tree removal on the adjacent Landsverk property.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Vickland:
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
I want to first.take a moment to thank you for allowing Duane Bowman and myself to come to
your house and hear your concerns in December. I also appreciate the letter you had Mr. Brian
Gilles submit to us on your behalf outlining his and your concerns on the tree removal that
occurred on the Landsverk's property. I apologize for the delay in writing this letter. And while
I'm afraid our conclusions don't reflect yours, I hope that this written explanation' of why the City
has acted as it has will give you an understanding of the things we considered in this event.
The City's policy in the application of the Tree Clearing ordinance, Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) chapter 18.45, requires that a tree -clearing permit be required to
remove trees unless the proposal is an exempt activity. Some of those exemptions apply to
properties of a certain zone without significant environmental features and other exemptions
apply to certain types of projects.:like maintenance or removal of hazardous trees.
In the case where a property is not exempt from the tree clearing permit requirement, and the
owner would like to have the removal of a hazardous tree considered exempt, the City will send
a staff person out to the site to confirm whether or not the trees are obvious hazards or not. My
training and experience as a Landscape Architect has taught me to look for weakness and
deformities in a tree that could lead to failure. These include conditions like forked tops,
unnatural crooks or bends in the trunk, a tree that is missing its natural leader and trees with
wounds on the trunk. Also, trees with an unnatural lean or bend would be considered to be
weak and potential hazards.
City staff is very sensitive and protective of Edmonds' natural vegetation. However, the City is
not interested in being held liable for making a property owner keep a tree on their property that
has a known structural deformity. Once the City has been made aware of a potentially
hazardous tree and confirmed its condition by a staff inspection or the report of a certified
arborist, ' we will inform a property owner that removal of that tree or trees meets an exemption
provision. They can then remove the tree without going through the tree clearing permit
process.
Our primary objective with all our codes is to obtain compliance with them. If someone
removes a so-called hazardous tree without the City's approval, we will tell the owner what the
correct process is, and if we can physically confirm through the remains of the tree that it was a
Incorporated August 11, 1890
_. . .1 .. I
Z
0
0
IT!
=i =5
171
M0
0
-40
0
X M
M Z
10 --1
C
Cn
0 -Ti
n
M M
0
0
0 M
C CJ)
9 CO)
M 0
Z
X
Z
Z
0
i
0
M
- "' 11 leave it at that. If not, we will require the owner to go through a tree clearing
N C mply with any conditions placed on that permit including replacement plantings.
0
00
deverk case, all trees cut down prior to December of 2000 were cut down as a result
proved Tree Clearing Permit or an exemption approved by me in December of 1999.
ro
a cut
cut down in December 2000 were not approved by either the previous Tree Clearing
y
It rorby an exemption approved by the City.
t out to t
J.Lwent out to the property the day after our meeting at your house, less than a week after the
trees were cut down, and reviewed all the trees that were removed. All of the trees were still
lying on the slope leading back to their stumps. In each case I photographed wounds or
structural deformities that would lead the City to granting an exemption for their removal (see
the attached 12 photographs). With that being the case, I contacted Mr. Landsverk and
confirmed with him that no more trees would be removed without the approval of a Tree
Clearing Permit or the City's confirmation that the removal qualified as an exemption. He
apologized and explained that he had misunderstood our ne * ed to confirm the hazardous tree
before he qualified for the exemption and was allowed to remove the tree. He also confirmed
for me that he would not remove any trees without first checking'with me.
I hope t is le er answe ur questions. If not please feel free to call me at 425.771.0220.
Since:Z 7
CC. Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Brian Gilles, Arborist for the Vicklands
,,/Street file for 19515 94th Pl. W.
Attachments: 12 photo's taken December 8th, 2001 by Steve Bullock identifying wounds and
structural deformities on trees cut down December, 2001.
Letter by Brian Gilles, dated January e, 2001
Z
0
4
0
M
FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL FORM
TO:
DATE:
MEMO TO: PERMIT COORDINATOR, BUILDING DIVISION
FROM: -FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE
LE E SIGN
���ENGINEERJNG DIVISION DATE
PLANNING DIVISION DATE
PLEASE SIGN
PROJECT___�
SITE ADDRESS fJ' Z
PERMIT # B#____-----PATE INSPECTED
DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE INSPECTED
A field inspection was conducted to determine compliance with -approved plans. Final approval
denotes that there are no objections from the above signed Department to the release of
PERFORMANCE BONDS.and the granting of:
GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
GRANT PROJECT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS NOTED
0 Copy of CONDITIONS given to owner/contractor by inspector
FAILED FINAL INSPECTION - OUTSTANDING ISSUES
0 Copy of CORRECTION NOTICE given to owner/contractor by inpector
I .
01
3.
RE -INSPECTED OUTSTANDING ISSUES - GRANT FINAL PROJECT APPROVAL
Date Signature
1:temp:b1dg:f6nns:ocaprv1 3/25/04
z
0
i
0
!'9
--I -n
0 M
C:
M 0
0
--1 0
0
M
M z
2cn:
0 _n
n x
>
M M
0
0
0 M
C: cn
K cn
M 0
Z
z
Cn
z
0
M
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
INSPECTOR
DATE APPROVED
SETBACKS .....................
FOUNDATION:
Footing ......................
Wall..........................
Pier/Porch .................
Retaining Wall ...........
Slab Insulation ..........
PLUMBING:
Underground .............
Rough -In ...................
Commercial Final ......
HEATING:
Gas Test ....................
Gas Piping .................
Equipment .................
Commercial Final .......
EXTERIOR SHEATHING
NAILING ..........................
FRAMING ........................
FIRST FLOOR FRAMING ...
INSULATION ...................
Floor Insulation .........
Wall Insulation ...........
Ceiling Insulation .......
SHEETROCK NAILING ...
SPECIAL INSPECTION ...
MISCELLANEOUS ..........
FINAL APPROVAL FOR
C.,
OCCUPANCY ..................
40
ew,
700q- 6 32 6, v1
z
0
A
0
M
--i -n
C M
M 0
0
__10
0 C
M
M Z
C _Z
0 _n
n
M M
C) 6
0 r-
0 M
C (/)
K C/)
Q 0
Z
z
0)
z
0
i
0